symbolic_product

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility. It only mentions computing products, but fails to disclose return format, error handling, or expression constraints. The scope finite/infinite is mentioned, but not enough.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff, but it sacrifices completeness. It earns its place but lacks essential details, balancing conciseness and informativeness poorly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the existence of sibling tools and an output schema, the description should clarify the product range syntax and provide examples. It omits contextual details needed for correct invocation, such as the expected form of expression.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 0%, yet description adds no parameter details. Parameter names and defaults are somewhat informative, but the description does not explain that expression is the term with index variable, or interpret start/end defaults.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool computes symbolic products, both finite and infinite. It distinguishes from siblings like symbolic_sum or symbolic_diff by specifying the operation (product vs sum/differentiation), though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as symbolic_sum, or any prerequisites. The description provides no context for invocation selection.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.